Preview
1 Daniel R. Friedenthal, Esq. – State Bar Number 136847
Michael G. Rix, Esq. – State Bar Number 233653
2 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP
1520 W. Colorado Boulevard, Second Floor
3
Pasadena, California 91105
4 Telephone: (626) 628-2800
Facsimile: (626) 628-2828
5 Email: dfriedenthal@fhblawyers.com
mrix@fhblawyers.com
6
Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE FAMILY SERVICES
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
FOR THE COUNTY OF SONOMA
10
11 C.F. by and through her Guardian and Case No.: SCV264540
Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR; [Assigned to Patrick M. Broderick; Dept. “16”]
12 E.F. by and through her Guardian and
Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR; DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO
13 S.F. by and through his Guardian and PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE
Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR, NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
14 DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR.
Plaintiffs, LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT
15
TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
16 AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION
OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL
17
18 v.
19
20
21 MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ; MARTHA
22 MARTINEZ; ALTERNATIVE FAMILY
SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1 - 30,
23
Defendants. Action Filed: 5/31/19
24 Trial Date 9/15/23
25 Defendant, Alternative Family Services, hereby opposes plaintiffs’ motion in
26 limine number five to exclude the testimony of defendant’s expert, Harvey Lerchin,
27 M.D., at trial.
28 ///
1
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
1 The motion will be made pursuant to the memorandum of points and authorities
2 served and filed herewith, the Declaration of Daniel R. Friedenthal served and filed
3 herewith, and on the records, pleadings and files in this action.
4
5 DATED: September 12, 2023 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP
6
7
By Daniel R. Friedenthal .
DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL, ESQ.
MICHAEL G. RIX, ESQ.
8 Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE
9 FAMILY SERVICES
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
2
3 I. INTRODUCTION
4 This is an action for alleged sexual assault and abuse brought on behalf of
5 three minor siblings, aged two, five and six, who were placed in the foster home of
6 former defendants, Mark Zapata Martinez and Martha Martinez in April 2018.
7 Plaintiffs had been removed from the home of their father, plaintiff, Solomon Farr, by
8 the County of Sonoma because their “father left the 4 children unattended in the car
9 overnight [with the keys left in the ignition] while he played poker [at a casino].” Two
10 months later, in June 2018, the minors alleged inappropriate touching by Mr. Martinez
11 and were removed from the home. Mr. Martinez was subsequently tried and
12 convicted of crimes related to his conduct with the minors.
13 Plaintiffs now move the court to exclude the testimony of defendant’s expert,
14 Harvey Lerchin, M.D., a board certified psychiatrist since 1980, on the absurd grounds
15 that Dr. Lerchin is “unqualified” to offer expert opinions in this matter. (A copy of Dr.
16 Lerchin’s curriculum vitae is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”) Plaintiffs assert that Dr.
17 Lerchin has little experience with the psychiatric issues of children. In is deposition
18 testimony, Dr. Lerchin noted that plaintiffs’ history “reminded me of the countless
19 cases which I consulted -- I mean, I'm talking about hundreds, if not thousands, of
20 cases, where I was the psychiatric consultant for Child Protective Services in San
21 Mateo County and Family Service Agency in San Mateo County.” (Deposition
22 testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 51, lines 15-19, attached hereto as Exhibit
23 “B.”)
24 In regard to testifying to a reasonable medical probability whether plaintiffs had
25 suffered sexual abuse, Dr. Lerchin stated that he could so testify that plaintiff, Cham
26 Farr, had suffered such abuse, but that plaintiffs, Emma Farr and Solomon Farr, were
27 not sexually abused. (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 28, line 17
28 – page 29, line 21, attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”)
3
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
1 Plaintiffs also assert that Dr. Lerchin cannot comment on the treatment plan
2 created by plaintiffs’ expert for plaintiffs as he had not created his own such plan. This
3 is ridiculous. Dr. Lerchin testified quite clearly that he believed plaintiffs’ expert’s
4 treatment plan was excessive. (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page
5 35, lines 17-25; page 100, line 18 – page 101, line 22, attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”)
6 Dr. Lerchin also pointed out that free therapy exists for individuals such as plaintiffs.
7 (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 103, line 18 – page 104, line 13,
8 attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”)
9 Finally, plaintiffs request that Dr. Lerchin’s testimony be barred in regard to any
10 prior trauma or history of neglect as it applies to plaintiffs’ claims for damages. Such
11 testimony goes directly to the nature and extent of plaintiffs’ claims and damages and
12 is completely admissible.
13 Dr. Lerchin noted that prior to the alleged incident with the Martinez family,
14 plaintiffs had been living lives without consistent mothering, constant moves and
15 neglect. (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 50, line19 – page 51,
16 line 21; page 55, line 21 – page 59, line 11, attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”)
17
18 II. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE GOES TO THE WEIGHT OF DR.
19 LERCHIN’S TESTIMONY, NOT TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THAT TESTIMONY
20 As noted above, plaintiffs are claiming that they were injured through the sexual
21 abuse of Mark Martinez. Dr. Lerchin’s testimony makes clear that while he believes
22 that plaintiff, Cham Farr, was abused, he does not, to a reasonable medical
23 probability, believe that Emma and Solomon Farr were so abused. Dr. Lrerchin’s
24 testimony is based upon his interviews with plaintiffs, review of evidence produced in
25 discovery and his over 40 years experience as a board certified psychiatrist, and one
26 who has been involved in thousands of child protective services cases. Dr. Lerchin is
27 absolutely entitled to rely upon such material and such experience. (Kelley v. Bailey
28 (1961) 189 Cal.App.2d 728, 737–738.)
4
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
1 In Hope v. Arrowhead & Puritas Waters, Inc. (1959) 174 Cal.App.2d 222, 230,
2 the court stated:
3 In forming his opinion an expert is not confined to his own
experience of facts personally known or observed by him, but
4 may take into consideration the products of his education and
study of his profession. Although textbooks are generally
5 inadmissible as hearsay, a doctor may give an opinion based
in part on his study thereof (citations omitted); a doctor may
6 testify to the history of an accident given him by a patient for
the purpose of showing the basis for his opinion on injuries
7 (citation omitted); and even though the opinion of an expert
cannot be predicated on that of another, it is proper for an
8 expert to express his own opinion based on facts testified to
by another expert or on tests made by other experts (citation
9 omitted).
10 Plaintiffs’ motion in limine is made of simply of conclusory statements
11 unsupported by actual evidence. The cited portions of Dr. Lerchin’s deposition
12 testimony provide an absolute basis for the admissibility of his expert opinions at trial.
13 It is apparent that plaintiffs are, in fact, objecting the soundness or the weight
14 of defendant’s expert’s testimony, and not to the admissibility of that testimony.
15 Attacks on the soundness of the opinion, the adequacy of methodology used or the
16 unorthodox nature of a witness' views go to the weight of an expert's opinion, not its
17 admissibility. For example, in People v. Brekke (1967) 250 Cal.App.2d 651, 657, 661–
18 662 , the court held that a psychiatrist could properly express an opinion regarding the
19 defendant’s mental state even though such opinion was based on a limited interview
20 where defendant revealed only his name, age, birth date and birth place. The court
21 noted that determination of the weight of an expert’s testimony is properly left to the
22 trier of fact.
23 Plaintiffs will also have ample opportunity to cross-examine Dr. Lerchin during
24 trial to attempt to convince the jury to disregard that expert’s testimony. Plaintiffs do
25 not have the right, however, to demand that the jury not hear the expert’s testimony at
26 all. (Hope v. Arrowhead & Puritas Waters, Inc., supra, 174 Cal.App.2d 222, 230-231.)
27 ///
28 ///
5
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
1 III. CONCLUSION
2 Based upon the foregoing, defendant, Alternative Family Services, requests
3 that the court deny the motion in limine.
4
5
DATED: September 12, 2023 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP
6
7 By: Daniel R. Friedenthal
8 DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL, ESQ.
MICHAEL G. RIX, ESQ.
9 Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE
FAMILY SERVICES
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
1 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL
2 Daniel R. Friedenthal declares:
3 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in California and a partner of the
4 firm of Friedenthal, Heffernan & Brown, attorneys of record for defendant, Alternative
5 Family Services.
6 2. A copy of Dr. Harvey Lerchin’s curriculum vitae is attached hereto as
7 Exhibit “A.”
8 3. On August 30, 2023, the deposition of Dr. Lerchin was taken. Cited
9 portions of the deposition testimony are attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”
10 If called as a witness I could and would competently testify under oath to the
11 above facts which are personally known to me.
12 Executed on September 12, 2023, at Pasadena, California.
13 I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California that the
14 foregoing is true and correct.
15 ___________________________
DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
·1· · · · · · ·SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
·2· · · · · · · · · ·COUNTY OF SONOMA
·3
·4· C.F., by and through her· · · · )
· · Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem, )
·5· SOLOMON FARR; E.F., by and· · · )
· · through her Guardian and· · · · )
·6· Guardian Ad Litem, SOLOMON FARR;)
· · S.F., by and through his· · · · )
·7· Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem, )
· · SOLOMON FARR,· · · · · · · · · ·)
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · · · · · · Plaintiffs,· · · · · ·)
·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · · · · v.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) No. SCV264540
10· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ; MARTHA· · )
11· MARTINEZ; ALTERNATIVE FAMILY· · )
· · SERVICES, INC.; COUNTY OF· · · ·)
12· SONOMA; STATE OF CALIFORNIA; and)
· · DOES 3-30,· · · · · · · · · · · )
13· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · · · · · · Defendants.· · · · · ·)
14
15
16· · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF HARVEY LERCHIN, MD
17· · · · · · · · · · August 30, 2023
18· · · · · · · · · · · ·Wednesday
19· · · · · · · · · · · ·9:18 A.M.
20
21· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOCONFERENCE VIDEO-RECORDED
22· DEPOSITION OF HARVEY LERCHIN, MD, was taken at
23· Novato, California, before Jan R. Duiven, CSR,
24· FCRR, RPR, CRC, Certified Shorthand Reporter in
25· and for the State of California.
YVer1f
YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 28
09:48:25 ·1· but with medical probability, my best answer is
09:48:28 ·2· that he was not directly sexually abused.
09:48:33 ·3· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
09:48:33 ·4· · · · Q.· · So to close the loop on this area,
09:48:37 ·5· with respect to Charm Farr, it's your opinion,
09:48:40 ·6· with medical probability, that she was sexually
09:48:42 ·7· abused at the Farr [sic] home?
09:48:45 ·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and
·9· answered.
09:48:46 10· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· Sorry.· Strike
09:48:47 11· that.
09:48:47 12· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and
13· answered.
09:48:48 14· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· And strike that,
09:48:49 15· because I -- I said the wrong thing.
16· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
09:48:52 17· · · · Q.· · To close the loop on this area with
09:48:54 18· regard to this, with respect to Charm Farr, it is
09:48:57 19· your opinion, with medical probability, that she
09:49:01 20· was sexually abused at the Martinez foster home.
09:49:04 21· Correct?
09:49:04 22· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and
09:49:04 23· answered.· You can answer again.
09:49:06 24· · · · A.· · Yes.· Correct.
09:49:09 25· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 29
09:49:09 ·1· · · · Q.· · With respect to Emma Farr, it's your
09:49:11 ·2· opinion, with medical probability, that you don't
09:49:14 ·3· know if she was sexually abused at the -- at the
09:49:17 ·4· Martinez home.· Correct?
09:49:19 ·5· · · · A.· · Correct.
09:49:20 ·6· · · · Q.· · And with respect to Solomon Farr, it's
09:49:23 ·7· your opinion, with medical probability, that he
09:49:26 ·8· was not abused sexually at the Martinez home.
09:49:29 ·9· Correct?
09:49:31 10· · · · A.· · That's my best opinion, but, again, I
09:49:34 11· do not know, but that's my best medical
09:49:36 12· probability response.
09:49:38 13· · · · Q.· · And we talked about this already.
09:49:40 14· It's your opinion that Emma Farr was not sexually
09:49:44 15· abused at the Martinez foster home, despite the
09:49:47 16· fact that Mr. Martinez pled guilty to and was
09:49:50 17· convicted of sexually abusing Emma Farr.· Correct?
09:49:55 18· · · · A.· · As you said a moment ago, I do not
09:49:57 19· know the answer, but I'm not of the belief, with
09:50:02 20· medical probability, that she was directly
09:50:05 21· sexually abused.
09:50:07 22· · · · Q.· · And you -- with respect to that
09:50:09 23· belief, I just want to confirm, that is despite
09:50:11 24· the fact that he pled guilty to and was convicted
09:50:14 25· of sexually abusing her.· Correct?
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 35
09:57:33 ·1· don't have one.
09:57:34 ·2· · · · Q.· · Okay.· With respect to Emma Farr and
09:57:42 ·3· Solomon Farr, given that you don't know or have an
09:57:48 ·4· opinion if they suffer from PTSD, would it be fair
09:57:51 ·5· to say you also don't have an opinion on a
09:57:53 ·6· treatment plan for them in the future for their
09:57:56 ·7· lifetime?
09:57:59 ·8· · · · A.· · I do not have a firm opinion with
09:58:01 ·9· regard to treatment of either of those two
09:58:04 10· youngsters, again, for the reasons stated
09:58:07 11· previously.
09:58:10 12· · · · Q.· · With respect to Charm Farr, have you
09:58:26 13· reviewed the treatment plan for her lifetime
09:58:31 14· provided by Dr. Ponton?
09:58:34 15· · · · A.· · It was supplied to me and yes, I did
09:58:38 16· review those various treatment recommendations.
09:58:43 17· · · · Q.· · Does that appear to be a reasonable
09:58:45 18· treatment plan for Charm Farr during her lifetime,
09:58:48 19· or do you have no opinion?
09:58:51 20· · · · A.· · My opinion is that even accepting that
09:58:59 21· she suffers from some level of posttraumatic
09:59:04 22· stress disorder, which I believe to be less severe
09:59:09 23· than that addressed by Dr. Ponton, that the
09:59:13 24· treatment program listed was excessive and beyond
09:59:22 25· what is needed in this case.
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 50
10:26:04 ·1· specifically?
10:26:07 ·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· And just --
10:26:08 ·3· counsel, just in fairness to the witness, if you
10:26:09 ·4· want to refer to your reports, you can feel free
10:26:11 ·5· to do that.· And you -- are you talking about
10:26:15 ·6· Charm Farr?
10:26:15 ·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· It's the same for
10:26:16 ·8· all three of them.· It just says there's prior
10:26:19 ·9· trauma.
10:26:19 10· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Okay.· I just
10:26:20 11· wanted clarification.
10:26:21 12· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
10:26:21 13· · · · Q.· · I'm talking about with all because I
10:26:23 14· think your reports are -- are -- granted, they're
10:26:25 15· three kids with similar histories, so I'm not
10:26:27 16· faulting you, but a lot of your report is the same
10:26:29 17· for each with regards to some of the background
10:26:31 18· and history.
10:26:31 19· · · · · · · So you talk about, in your reports,
10:26:33 20· that there was prior trauma of the children.· What
10:26:36 21· was the prior trauma prior to the sexual abuse
10:26:40 22· you're referring to specifically?
10:26:41 23· · · · A.· · To address your concerns and
10:26:54 24· questions, I was, in all three of those cases,
10:26:59 25· referring to -- if nothing else, the fact that
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 51
10:27:03 ·1· they had been removed from the father's care; and
10:27:12 ·2· that for reasons not explained to me and not
10:27:19 ·3· evident to me, despite my requesting CPS-type
10:27:22 ·4· records or any of the records, I knew very little
10:27:24 ·5· at that point except that these youngsters, partly
10:27:29 ·6· by their own history to me, had been living lives
10:27:39 ·7· to that point without a consistent mothering and
10:27:43 ·8· with lots of moves, it seemed.· And that, I
10:27:52 ·9· consider to be trauma, in and of itself.
10:27:56 10· · · · · · · It seems rather obvious, then.· I can
10:28:00 11· leave it at that.· But there was a whole history
10:28:02 12· of neglect, it seemed, and certain -- and then
10:28:06 13· call that trauma, if you will -- and I certainly
10:28:09 14· will -- which reminded me of the countless cases
10:28:14 15· which I consulted -- I mean, I'm talking about
10:28:16 16· hundreds, if not thousands, of cases, where I was
10:28:19 17· the psychiatric consultant for Child Protective
10:28:22 18· Services in San Mateo County and Family Service
10:28:25 19· Agency in San Mateo County.· So it just -- it's
10:28:31 20· kind of like an obvious, if you will, to answer
10:28:35 21· your question.
10:28:36 22· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Well, let me ask the question
10:28:37 23· again because that was not really exactly the
10:28:39 24· question that you were answering.
10:28:41 25· · · · · · · So my question is -- and we'll make a
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 55
10:31:47 ·1· complicated by all the bits of information that I
10:31:49 ·2· have learned since doing that examination.
10:31:56 ·3· · · · · · · The fact that these kids were left --
10:31:59 ·4· these four children were left in an automobile by
10:32:03 ·5· themselves with the keys in the ignition, I'm
10:32:06 ·6· told, on a -- overnight, I would call traumatic.
10:32:12 ·7· · · · Q.· · Okay.
10:32:13 ·8· · · · A.· · Certainly, I would call it an incident
10:32:15 ·9· of neglect.· Obviously, the authorities agreed
10:32:18 10· with me because I think that was the reason for
10:32:21 11· their removal from the father's care.
10:32:23 12· · · · Q.· · Right.
10:32:24 13· · · · A.· · I did not know this information at the
10:32:26 14· time I wrote my report.
10:32:27 15· · · · Q.· · Okay.
10:32:27 16· · · · A.· · But there was much suggestion in the
10:32:33 17· bit of history that I had, including what the kids
10:32:36 18· told me, that their prior years of life had been
10:32:47 19· deprived of what I consider healthy nurturing and
10:32:55 20· their -- i.e., I'm calling that traumatic.
10:32:58 21· · · · Q.· · All right.· So it sounds like we
10:33:01 22· got -- at the end, we kind of got to a list.· So I
10:33:05 23· made a list because I think in lists and so let's
10:33:07 24· do the list and we can talk about evidence then
10:33:09 25· after that.
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 56
10:33:10 ·1· · · · · · · It's your opinion -- strike that.
10:33:11 ·2· · · · · · · It's your opinion in this case that
10:33:17 ·3· the children had prior trauma.· Correct?
10:33:22 ·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and
10:33:23 ·5· answered.
10:33:23 ·6· · · · A.· · Yes.· Yes.· Absolutely.
10:33:25 ·7· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
10:33:25 ·8· · · · Q.· · And we've just made a list, and I
10:33:28 ·9· asked you to tell me of the prior trauma that
10:33:31 10· you're referring to, and I'm going to read the
10:33:34 11· list and tell me if there's anything you want to
10:33:36 12· add.
10:33:37 13· · · · · · · You first said that any child removed
10:33:39 14· from the care of their parents, that's trauma and
10:33:42 15· neglect.· You then said that there was an
10:33:44 16· inconsistent presence of their biological mother
10:33:48 17· and questions around her.· You then said that the
10:33:51 18· kids were left in the car overnight, and then we
10:33:53 19· agreed that that was actually part of their
10:33:56 20· removals.· That's part of part one and that's
10:33:59 21· neglect.· And then you then said that their prior
10:34:03 22· years of life they were deprived of healthy
10:34:05 23· nurturing.
10:34:06 24· · · · · · · Do you -- do you have anything else
10:34:07 25· you want to add to that list of prior trauma?
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 57
10:34:15 ·1· · · · A.· · Yes, but not with confidence, again,
10:34:17 ·2· because of the lack of information.· But Father
10:34:19 ·3· was imprisoned and jailed at times.· I do not know
10:34:24 ·4· whether that's true during the times of -- of any
10:34:30 ·5· of these youngsters' lives, but I had that
10:34:34 ·6· question.· That would have been trauma.
10:34:35 ·7· · · · · · · The mother's drug use, I'm -- is
10:34:39 ·8· implied in much of the history that I've read.
10:34:43 ·9· But, there again, I do not know to -- what these
10:34:46 10· children were exposed to.· But those kind of items
10:34:49 11· do fit with me referencing trauma and neglect in
10:34:57 12· these youngsters' first one to five years of --
10:35:04 13· one to seven years of life.
10:35:06 14· · · · Q.· · So do you want to add to your list,
10:35:10 15· with medical probability, that the father was
10:35:13 16· imprisoned and in jail during the youngsters'
10:35:16 17· lifetimes and that the mothers [sic] were somehow
10:35:18 18· aware of -- of their mother's drug use?· Is that
10:35:21 19· something you want to add, with medical
10:35:22 20· probability, to your list of prior trauma?
10:35:24 21· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Foundation.
10:35:25 22· · · · A.· · Certainly -- certainly not.· I'm
10:35:28 23· sorry.· Let me finish.
10:35:29 24· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Objection.
10:35:30 25· Foundation.· Argumentative.· Compound.· You can
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 58
10:35:33 ·1· answer.
10:35:34 ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yeah.· Not with
10:35:36 ·3· medical probability because, as I've said in my
10:35:38 ·4· answer, I don't have the timeline that I need to
10:35:42 ·5· call it medically probable, but I sure do raise it
10:35:46 ·6· as a concern and a question to be answered and as
10:35:50 ·7· part of a -- an overview that I firmly call
10:36:00 ·8· neglectful and unhealthy and traumatic.
10:36:07 ·9· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
10:36:08 10· · · · Q.· · Okay.· So my question is, with medical
10:36:11 11· probability -- because I want to go through your
10:36:14 12· list now of prior trauma and the evidence that
10:36:16 13· supports it because there has to be evidence in a
10:36:18 14· case like this, which you know.· Do you want to
10:36:20 15· add those last two items to your list, with
10:36:22 16· medical probability, or do you want to stick with
10:36:24 17· the four you provided earlier?
10:36:26 18· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Argumentative.
10:36:27 19· You can answer.
10:36:29 20· · · · A.· · I think I have answered already. I
10:36:31 21· gave you the ones that I understood to be
10:36:34 22· medically probable based upon evidence, if -- you
10:36:39 23· can call some of this as hearsay evidence, and the
10:36:44 24· others as concerns, but without timeline, so,
10:36:48 25· therefore, it can be criticized as not fitting
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 59
10:36:52 ·1· medical probability, but as areas of interest,
10:36:59 ·2· concern, worry.
10:37:01 ·3· · · · · · · And all these add to the outcomes, by
10:37:09 ·4· my experience, of various forms of mental
10:37:21 ·5· symptoms, mental condition, mental disability,
10:37:26 ·6· mood instability and such, as is seen included in
10:37:33 ·7· complex posttraumatic stress disorder.· And
10:37:38 ·8· that's -- which certainly is something that -- I
10:37:43 ·9· shouldn't say certainly -- that I feel is the case
10:37:45 10· with Charm and perhaps -- perhaps -- with her
10:37:51 11· siblings.
10:37:52 12· BY MR. MONTGOMERY:
10:37:54 13· · · · Q.· · Okay.· So with respect to the -- your
10:38:00 14· opinions, with medical probability, as to what
10:38:02 15· their prior trauma is, there's four, and we listed
10:38:06 16· them out.· Correct?
10:38:10 17· · · · A.· · At a minimum.
10:38:11 18· · · · Q.· · Well, do you want me to read them
10:38:12 19· again?· We did -- I --
10:38:14 20· · · · A.· · No.· I'm saying but your four is not a
10:38:16 21· complete list.
10:38:16 22· · · · Q.· · They were the ones that you said "with
10:38:18 23· medical probability."· You understand how this
10:38:20 24· works, Doctor.· You've done this thousands of
10:38:22 25· times.· You're just going to prolong it because
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 100
11:31:27 ·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· If it's going to
11:31:28 ·2· be, like, 30 to an hour or something --
11:31:29 ·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Yeah.· No.
11:31:30 ·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· -- I would need to
11:31:31 ·5· take a break.
11:31:31 ·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· No.· It will be
11:31:32 ·7· less than five minutes.
11:31:33 ·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· Oh, okay.· Sorry.
11:31:35 ·9· Then go ahead.· Sorry to interrupt, guys.
11:31:36 10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Would the -- yeah.
11:31:38 11· Just to continue what I was saying, it was just
11:31:40 12· a -- I'm looking at it right now -- but it was a
11:31:42 13· very large number, more than I've ever recommended
11:31:46 14· or even seen recommended, even with very severe
11:31:51 15· sexual abuse.· So that's why I called it
11:31:53 16· "excessive."
11:31:53 17· BY MR. FRIEDENTHAL:
11:31:54 18· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And let's go with the number of
11:31:57 19· individual therapy that Dr. Ponton suggested was
11:32:02 20· appropriate for -- or recommended for Charm Farr.
11:32:06 21· What number -- what number do you think is more
11:32:08 22· realistic, if -- if you don't agree with her
11:32:10 23· 400 -- suggestion of 400 treatments?
11:32:14 24· · · · A.· · She's talking -- as I'm looking at it
11:32:16 25· right now, on page 6 of her report on Charm --
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 101
11:32:20 ·1· Charm Farr, it looks to be two hour psychotherapy
11:32:25 ·2· sessions per week for four years.· That's a lot.
11:32:30 ·3· · · · Q.· · Okay.
11:32:30 ·4· · · · A.· · And years of family therapy for Charm
11:32:35 ·5· Farr with her parents -- I'm actually more
11:32:38 ·6· inclined to agree that family therapy is necessary
11:32:40 ·7· here and that kind of addresses my beliefs that
11:32:44 ·8· there's early trauma here.· And whose
11:32:52 ·9· responsibility, that is another issue.· Not for me
11:32:55 10· right now, I imagine, but that made more sense to
11:32:59 11· me.
11:32:59 12· · · · · · · But even -- so two years of family
11:33:01 13· therapy is a lot to recommend.· Again, it's
11:33:07 14· probably impractical because these folks have not
11:33:10 15· even followed through.· The parents -- the father,
11:33:14 16· really -- has not even followed through with
11:33:16 17· psychotherapy in the -- from what I read -- with
11:33:23 18· Ms. Morehouse, I think is her name, such that it
11:33:27 19· had to be discontinued.
11:33:28 20· · · · · · · But that as an aside, it seems pie in
11:33:31 21· the sky to me and it's just a lot.· It's really a
11:33:39 22· lot.
11:33:39 23· · · · Q.· · Well, aside from saying, "It's a lot,"
11:33:42 24· do you have any numbers in mind or ranges in mind
11:33:45 25· that would be not a lot that would be more
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 103
11:35:07 ·1· fitting with what a seasoned therapist charges
11:35:10 ·2· for -- for psychotherapy, individual
11:35:15 ·3· psychotherapy, or even family therapy.· $400, I
11:35:18 ·4· see for family therapy.· Wow.· That's high.
11:35:22 ·5· · · · Q.· · Do you know why these three children
11:35:27 ·6· haven't had therapy consistently since the -- they
11:35:31 ·7· were taken out of the Martinez home?
11:35:34 ·8· · · · A.· · Well, the only thing I know for, I
11:35:37 ·9· guess, a fact is that the therapy provided by, I
11:35:43 10· think, Interfaith -- I forget the name of it --
11:35:46 11· Interfaith Network, I think, had to be
11:35:48 12· discontinued because of lack of compliance.· So
11:35:51 13· that interrupted what was a therapy program.· So
11:35:56 14· that'd be one factor.
11:35:59 15· · · · · · · Lack of motivation, lack of
11:36:00 16· compliance, alcoholic on the part of, let's say,
11:36:03 17· the parent, Mr. Farr.
11:36:10 18· · · · Q.· · Are there services that are provided
11:36:13 19· free of charge or for a significantly reduced
11:36:17 20· charge that you're aware of through any
11:36:20 21· organization or -- or governmental entity for
11:36:24 22· victims of child abuse?
11:36:27 23· · · · A.· · Certainly, yes.· There's community
11:36:29 24· mental health.· As I said, I was involved in that
11:36:33 25· for so many years.· It still exists in each of the
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023
Page 104
11:36:38 ·1· counties in California and these -- these
11:36:40 ·2· youngsters would qualify there.
11:36:42 ·3· · · · · · · They'd probably almost certainly
11:36:46 ·4· qualify for Medicaid services, considering the
11:36:49 ·5· income level.· And even more easily, they qualify
11:36:54 ·6· for witness -- not witness -- child victim --
11:37:00 ·7· victim program, child victim -- California child
11:37:03 ·8· victim program that pays the fee, the therapist's
11:37:08 ·9· fee for youngsters of -- where there's known
11:37:15 10· abuse, and that would -- at least Charm would
11:37:18 11· qualify for that one, if not the other children as
11:37:20 12· well.· The Victim Witness Program, I think it's
11:37:23 13· called.
11:37:24 14· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Last area of questioning.
11:37:26 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· And just belated --
11:37:28 16· and just belated objection.· Improper references
11:37:30 17· to collateral source.· Not relevant.· Not
11:37:33 18· reasonably calculated.· Sorry.· Go ahead.
19· BY MR. FRIEDENTHAL:
11:37:35 20· · · · Q.· · Last -- last area of questioning.· You
11:37:37 21· had a chance to review the mental health notes
11:37:39 22· from -- that you were provided.· Correct?· From --
11:37:46 23· · · · A.· · You mean therapy notes?
11:37:48 24· · · · Q.· · From Morehouse?
11:37:49 25· · · · A.· · Yes.
YVer1f
Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112
www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
C.F., et al. v. Martinez, et al.
2 Case No.: SCV264540
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
4
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
5 I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the
6 age of 18 and not a party to this action. My business address is: 1520 W. Colorado
Boulevard, Second Floor, Pasadena, California 91105. My electronic (email) address
7 is nruiz@fhblawyers.com.
8 On September 12, 2023, I electronically served the foregoing document
named: DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE
9 NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM
TESTIFYING AT TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;
10 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL on the parties indicated in the
attached Service List.
11
MAIL SERVICE: As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of
12 collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would
be deposited with U.S. postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully
13 prepaid at Pasadena, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that
on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date
14 or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in
15 affidavit.
FEDERAL EXPRESS SERVICE: I caused such envelopes to be delivered by
16
Federal Express to the offices of the addressee listed on the attached Service List. I
17 further designed such envelopes to be delivered to all addressees on the attached
Service List utilizing Fed-Ex’s “Overnight Next-Day Delivery Service.”
18
ELECTRONIC MEANS (EMAIL): I caused such document(s) to be electronically
19 served through email for the above-entitled matter. This service complies with Code
of Civil Procedure §1010.6(e)(1) and/or California Rule of Court 2.251(C)(3) and/or
20 an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission. The file
transmission was reported as complete and a copy of the “Sent” page noting the date
21
and time of such transmission will be maintained with the file copy of the document(s)
22 in our office.
23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the above is true and correct. Executed on September 12, 2023, at Pasadena,
24 California.
25
Natasha Ruiz
26
27 For purposes of serving documents on Friedenthal, Heffernan & Brown, LLP,
please use the following email addresses:
28 dfriedenthal@fhblawyers.com; jbrown@fhblawyers.com;
nruiz@fhblawyers.com
-1-
PROOF OF SERVICE
1 SERVICE LIST
C.F., et al. v. Martinez, et al.
2 Case No.: SCV264540
3
Attorneys for Plaintiffs, C.F., E.F. and S.F. by and through their GAL,
4 SOLOMON FARR
Scott R. Montgomery, Esq. Johann Hall, Esq.
5 ABBEY, WEITZENBERG, WARREN & THE LAW OFFICE OF JOHANN HALL
EMERY, P.C. 703 2nd St., Suite 353
6 100 Stony Point Rd., Suite 200 Santa Rosa, CA 95405
Santa Rosa, CA 95402 Tel. No.: (707) 360-8717
7
Tel. No.: (707) 542-5050 Fax No.: (707) 921-7378
8 Fax No.: (707) 542-2589 johann@jhallesq.com
smontgomery@abbeylaw.com;
9 hnorton@abbeylaw.com;
nberg@abbeylaw.com;
10 kwright@abbeylaw.com
11
Criminal Attorneys for MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ
12 Chris P. Andrian, Esq.
ANDRIAN & GALLENSON
13 1100 Mendocino Ave.
Santa Rosa, CA 95401
14 Tel. No.: (707) 527-9381
15 Fax No.: (707) 526-9051
Andgal.chris@sonic.net
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
PROOF OF SERVICE
Preview
1 Daniel R. Friedenthal, Esq. – State Bar Number 136847 Michael G. Rix, Esq. – State Bar Number 233653 2 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP 1520 W. Colorado Boulevard, Second Floor 3 Pasadena, California 91105 4 Telephone: (626) 628-2800 Facsimile: (626) 628-2828 5 Email: dfriedenthal@fhblawyers.com mrix@fhblawyers.com 6 Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE FAMILY SERVICES 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF SONOMA 10 11 C.F. by and through her Guardian and Case No.: SCV264540 Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR; [Assigned to Patrick M. Broderick; Dept. “16”] 12 E.F. by and through her Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR; DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO 13 S.F. by and through his Guardian and PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR, NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE 14 DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. Plaintiffs, LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT 15 TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS 16 AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL 17 18 v. 19 20 21 MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ; MARTHA 22 MARTINEZ; ALTERNATIVE FAMILY SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1 - 30, 23 Defendants. Action Filed: 5/31/19 24 Trial Date 9/15/23 25 Defendant, Alternative Family Services, hereby opposes plaintiffs’ motion in 26 limine number five to exclude the testimony of defendant’s expert, Harvey Lerchin, 27 M.D., at trial. 28 /// 1 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL 1 The motion will be made pursuant to the memorandum of points and authorities 2 served and filed herewith, the Declaration of Daniel R. Friedenthal served and filed 3 herewith, and on the records, pleadings and files in this action. 4 5 DATED: September 12, 2023 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP 6 7 By Daniel R. Friedenthal . DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL, ESQ. MICHAEL G. RIX, ESQ. 8 Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE 9 FAMILY SERVICES 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL 1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 2 3 I. INTRODUCTION 4 This is an action for alleged sexual assault and abuse brought on behalf of 5 three minor siblings, aged two, five and six, who were placed in the foster home of 6 former defendants, Mark Zapata Martinez and Martha Martinez in April 2018. 7 Plaintiffs had been removed from the home of their father, plaintiff, Solomon Farr, by 8 the County of Sonoma because their “father left the 4 children unattended in the car 9 overnight [with the keys left in the ignition] while he played poker [at a casino].” Two 10 months later, in June 2018, the minors alleged inappropriate touching by Mr. Martinez 11 and were removed from the home. Mr. Martinez was subsequently tried and 12 convicted of crimes related to his conduct with the minors. 13 Plaintiffs now move the court to exclude the testimony of defendant’s expert, 14 Harvey Lerchin, M.D., a board certified psychiatrist since 1980, on the absurd grounds 15 that Dr. Lerchin is “unqualified” to offer expert opinions in this matter. (A copy of Dr. 16 Lerchin’s curriculum vitae is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”) Plaintiffs assert that Dr. 17 Lerchin has little experience with the psychiatric issues of children. In is deposition 18 testimony, Dr. Lerchin noted that plaintiffs’ history “reminded me of the countless 19 cases which I consulted -- I mean, I'm talking about hundreds, if not thousands, of 20 cases, where I was the psychiatric consultant for Child Protective Services in San 21 Mateo County and Family Service Agency in San Mateo County.” (Deposition 22 testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 51, lines 15-19, attached hereto as Exhibit 23 “B.”) 24 In regard to testifying to a reasonable medical probability whether plaintiffs had 25 suffered sexual abuse, Dr. Lerchin stated that he could so testify that plaintiff, Cham 26 Farr, had suffered such abuse, but that plaintiffs, Emma Farr and Solomon Farr, were 27 not sexually abused. (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 28, line 17 28 – page 29, line 21, attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”) 3 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL 1 Plaintiffs also assert that Dr. Lerchin cannot comment on the treatment plan 2 created by plaintiffs’ expert for plaintiffs as he had not created his own such plan. This 3 is ridiculous. Dr. Lerchin testified quite clearly that he believed plaintiffs’ expert’s 4 treatment plan was excessive. (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 5 35, lines 17-25; page 100, line 18 – page 101, line 22, attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”) 6 Dr. Lerchin also pointed out that free therapy exists for individuals such as plaintiffs. 7 (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 103, line 18 – page 104, line 13, 8 attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”) 9 Finally, plaintiffs request that Dr. Lerchin’s testimony be barred in regard to any 10 prior trauma or history of neglect as it applies to plaintiffs’ claims for damages. Such 11 testimony goes directly to the nature and extent of plaintiffs’ claims and damages and 12 is completely admissible. 13 Dr. Lerchin noted that prior to the alleged incident with the Martinez family, 14 plaintiffs had been living lives without consistent mothering, constant moves and 15 neglect. (Deposition testimony of Harvey Lerchin, M.D., page 50, line19 – page 51, 16 line 21; page 55, line 21 – page 59, line 11, attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”) 17 18 II. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE GOES TO THE WEIGHT OF DR. 19 LERCHIN’S TESTIMONY, NOT TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THAT TESTIMONY 20 As noted above, plaintiffs are claiming that they were injured through the sexual 21 abuse of Mark Martinez. Dr. Lerchin’s testimony makes clear that while he believes 22 that plaintiff, Cham Farr, was abused, he does not, to a reasonable medical 23 probability, believe that Emma and Solomon Farr were so abused. Dr. Lrerchin’s 24 testimony is based upon his interviews with plaintiffs, review of evidence produced in 25 discovery and his over 40 years experience as a board certified psychiatrist, and one 26 who has been involved in thousands of child protective services cases. Dr. Lerchin is 27 absolutely entitled to rely upon such material and such experience. (Kelley v. Bailey 28 (1961) 189 Cal.App.2d 728, 737–738.) 4 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL 1 In Hope v. Arrowhead & Puritas Waters, Inc. (1959) 174 Cal.App.2d 222, 230, 2 the court stated: 3 In forming his opinion an expert is not confined to his own experience of facts personally known or observed by him, but 4 may take into consideration the products of his education and study of his profession. Although textbooks are generally 5 inadmissible as hearsay, a doctor may give an opinion based in part on his study thereof (citations omitted); a doctor may 6 testify to the history of an accident given him by a patient for the purpose of showing the basis for his opinion on injuries 7 (citation omitted); and even though the opinion of an expert cannot be predicated on that of another, it is proper for an 8 expert to express his own opinion based on facts testified to by another expert or on tests made by other experts (citation 9 omitted). 10 Plaintiffs’ motion in limine is made of simply of conclusory statements 11 unsupported by actual evidence. The cited portions of Dr. Lerchin’s deposition 12 testimony provide an absolute basis for the admissibility of his expert opinions at trial. 13 It is apparent that plaintiffs are, in fact, objecting the soundness or the weight 14 of defendant’s expert’s testimony, and not to the admissibility of that testimony. 15 Attacks on the soundness of the opinion, the adequacy of methodology used or the 16 unorthodox nature of a witness' views go to the weight of an expert's opinion, not its 17 admissibility. For example, in People v. Brekke (1967) 250 Cal.App.2d 651, 657, 661– 18 662 , the court held that a psychiatrist could properly express an opinion regarding the 19 defendant’s mental state even though such opinion was based on a limited interview 20 where defendant revealed only his name, age, birth date and birth place. The court 21 noted that determination of the weight of an expert’s testimony is properly left to the 22 trier of fact. 23 Plaintiffs will also have ample opportunity to cross-examine Dr. Lerchin during 24 trial to attempt to convince the jury to disregard that expert’s testimony. Plaintiffs do 25 not have the right, however, to demand that the jury not hear the expert’s testimony at 26 all. (Hope v. Arrowhead & Puritas Waters, Inc., supra, 174 Cal.App.2d 222, 230-231.) 27 /// 28 /// 5 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL 1 III. CONCLUSION 2 Based upon the foregoing, defendant, Alternative Family Services, requests 3 that the court deny the motion in limine. 4 5 DATED: September 12, 2023 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP 6 7 By: Daniel R. Friedenthal 8 DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL, ESQ. MICHAEL G. RIX, ESQ. 9 Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE FAMILY SERVICES 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL 1 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL 2 Daniel R. Friedenthal declares: 3 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in California and a partner of the 4 firm of Friedenthal, Heffernan & Brown, attorneys of record for defendant, Alternative 5 Family Services. 6 2. A copy of Dr. Harvey Lerchin’s curriculum vitae is attached hereto as 7 Exhibit “A.” 8 3. On August 30, 2023, the deposition of Dr. Lerchin was taken. Cited 9 portions of the deposition testimony are attached hereto as Exhibit “B.” 10 If called as a witness I could and would competently testify under oath to the 11 above facts which are personally known to me. 12 Executed on September 12, 2023, at Pasadena, California. 13 I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California that the 14 foregoing is true and correct. 15 ___________________________ DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B ·1· · · · · · ·SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA ·2· · · · · · · · · ·COUNTY OF SONOMA ·3 ·4· C.F., by and through her· · · · ) · · Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem, ) ·5· SOLOMON FARR; E.F., by and· · · ) · · through her Guardian and· · · · ) ·6· Guardian Ad Litem, SOLOMON FARR;) · · S.F., by and through his· · · · ) ·7· Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem, ) · · SOLOMON FARR,· · · · · · · · · ·) ·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) · · · · · · · Plaintiffs,· · · · · ·) ·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) · · · · · v.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) No. SCV264540 10· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) · · MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ; MARTHA· · ) 11· MARTINEZ; ALTERNATIVE FAMILY· · ) · · SERVICES, INC.; COUNTY OF· · · ·) 12· SONOMA; STATE OF CALIFORNIA; and) · · DOES 3-30,· · · · · · · · · · · ) 13· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) · · · · · · · Defendants.· · · · · ·) 14 15 16· · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF HARVEY LERCHIN, MD 17· · · · · · · · · · August 30, 2023 18· · · · · · · · · · · ·Wednesday 19· · · · · · · · · · · ·9:18 A.M. 20 21· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOCONFERENCE VIDEO-RECORDED 22· DEPOSITION OF HARVEY LERCHIN, MD, was taken at 23· Novato, California, before Jan R. Duiven, CSR, 24· FCRR, RPR, CRC, Certified Shorthand Reporter in 25· and for the State of California. YVer1f YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 28 09:48:25 ·1· but with medical probability, my best answer is 09:48:28 ·2· that he was not directly sexually abused. 09:48:33 ·3· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: 09:48:33 ·4· · · · Q.· · So to close the loop on this area, 09:48:37 ·5· with respect to Charm Farr, it's your opinion, 09:48:40 ·6· with medical probability, that she was sexually 09:48:42 ·7· abused at the Farr [sic] home? 09:48:45 ·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and ·9· answered. 09:48:46 10· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· Sorry.· Strike 09:48:47 11· that. 09:48:47 12· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and 13· answered. 09:48:48 14· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· And strike that, 09:48:49 15· because I -- I said the wrong thing. 16· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: 09:48:52 17· · · · Q.· · To close the loop on this area with 09:48:54 18· regard to this, with respect to Charm Farr, it is 09:48:57 19· your opinion, with medical probability, that she 09:49:01 20· was sexually abused at the Martinez foster home. 09:49:04 21· Correct? 09:49:04 22· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and 09:49:04 23· answered.· You can answer again. 09:49:06 24· · · · A.· · Yes.· Correct. 09:49:09 25· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 29 09:49:09 ·1· · · · Q.· · With respect to Emma Farr, it's your 09:49:11 ·2· opinion, with medical probability, that you don't 09:49:14 ·3· know if she was sexually abused at the -- at the 09:49:17 ·4· Martinez home.· Correct? 09:49:19 ·5· · · · A.· · Correct. 09:49:20 ·6· · · · Q.· · And with respect to Solomon Farr, it's 09:49:23 ·7· your opinion, with medical probability, that he 09:49:26 ·8· was not abused sexually at the Martinez home. 09:49:29 ·9· Correct? 09:49:31 10· · · · A.· · That's my best opinion, but, again, I 09:49:34 11· do not know, but that's my best medical 09:49:36 12· probability response. 09:49:38 13· · · · Q.· · And we talked about this already. 09:49:40 14· It's your opinion that Emma Farr was not sexually 09:49:44 15· abused at the Martinez foster home, despite the 09:49:47 16· fact that Mr. Martinez pled guilty to and was 09:49:50 17· convicted of sexually abusing Emma Farr.· Correct? 09:49:55 18· · · · A.· · As you said a moment ago, I do not 09:49:57 19· know the answer, but I'm not of the belief, with 09:50:02 20· medical probability, that she was directly 09:50:05 21· sexually abused. 09:50:07 22· · · · Q.· · And you -- with respect to that 09:50:09 23· belief, I just want to confirm, that is despite 09:50:11 24· the fact that he pled guilty to and was convicted 09:50:14 25· of sexually abusing her.· Correct? YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 35 09:57:33 ·1· don't have one. 09:57:34 ·2· · · · Q.· · Okay.· With respect to Emma Farr and 09:57:42 ·3· Solomon Farr, given that you don't know or have an 09:57:48 ·4· opinion if they suffer from PTSD, would it be fair 09:57:51 ·5· to say you also don't have an opinion on a 09:57:53 ·6· treatment plan for them in the future for their 09:57:56 ·7· lifetime? 09:57:59 ·8· · · · A.· · I do not have a firm opinion with 09:58:01 ·9· regard to treatment of either of those two 09:58:04 10· youngsters, again, for the reasons stated 09:58:07 11· previously. 09:58:10 12· · · · Q.· · With respect to Charm Farr, have you 09:58:26 13· reviewed the treatment plan for her lifetime 09:58:31 14· provided by Dr. Ponton? 09:58:34 15· · · · A.· · It was supplied to me and yes, I did 09:58:38 16· review those various treatment recommendations. 09:58:43 17· · · · Q.· · Does that appear to be a reasonable 09:58:45 18· treatment plan for Charm Farr during her lifetime, 09:58:48 19· or do you have no opinion? 09:58:51 20· · · · A.· · My opinion is that even accepting that 09:58:59 21· she suffers from some level of posttraumatic 09:59:04 22· stress disorder, which I believe to be less severe 09:59:09 23· than that addressed by Dr. Ponton, that the 09:59:13 24· treatment program listed was excessive and beyond 09:59:22 25· what is needed in this case. YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 50 10:26:04 ·1· specifically? 10:26:07 ·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· And just -- 10:26:08 ·3· counsel, just in fairness to the witness, if you 10:26:09 ·4· want to refer to your reports, you can feel free 10:26:11 ·5· to do that.· And you -- are you talking about 10:26:15 ·6· Charm Farr? 10:26:15 ·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· It's the same for 10:26:16 ·8· all three of them.· It just says there's prior 10:26:19 ·9· trauma. 10:26:19 10· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Okay.· I just 10:26:20 11· wanted clarification. 10:26:21 12· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: 10:26:21 13· · · · Q.· · I'm talking about with all because I 10:26:23 14· think your reports are -- are -- granted, they're 10:26:25 15· three kids with similar histories, so I'm not 10:26:27 16· faulting you, but a lot of your report is the same 10:26:29 17· for each with regards to some of the background 10:26:31 18· and history. 10:26:31 19· · · · · · · So you talk about, in your reports, 10:26:33 20· that there was prior trauma of the children.· What 10:26:36 21· was the prior trauma prior to the sexual abuse 10:26:40 22· you're referring to specifically? 10:26:41 23· · · · A.· · To address your concerns and 10:26:54 24· questions, I was, in all three of those cases, 10:26:59 25· referring to -- if nothing else, the fact that YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 51 10:27:03 ·1· they had been removed from the father's care; and 10:27:12 ·2· that for reasons not explained to me and not 10:27:19 ·3· evident to me, despite my requesting CPS-type 10:27:22 ·4· records or any of the records, I knew very little 10:27:24 ·5· at that point except that these youngsters, partly 10:27:29 ·6· by their own history to me, had been living lives 10:27:39 ·7· to that point without a consistent mothering and 10:27:43 ·8· with lots of moves, it seemed.· And that, I 10:27:52 ·9· consider to be trauma, in and of itself. 10:27:56 10· · · · · · · It seems rather obvious, then.· I can 10:28:00 11· leave it at that.· But there was a whole history 10:28:02 12· of neglect, it seemed, and certain -- and then 10:28:06 13· call that trauma, if you will -- and I certainly 10:28:09 14· will -- which reminded me of the countless cases 10:28:14 15· which I consulted -- I mean, I'm talking about 10:28:16 16· hundreds, if not thousands, of cases, where I was 10:28:19 17· the psychiatric consultant for Child Protective 10:28:22 18· Services in San Mateo County and Family Service 10:28:25 19· Agency in San Mateo County.· So it just -- it's 10:28:31 20· kind of like an obvious, if you will, to answer 10:28:35 21· your question. 10:28:36 22· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Well, let me ask the question 10:28:37 23· again because that was not really exactly the 10:28:39 24· question that you were answering. 10:28:41 25· · · · · · · So my question is -- and we'll make a YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 55 10:31:47 ·1· complicated by all the bits of information that I 10:31:49 ·2· have learned since doing that examination. 10:31:56 ·3· · · · · · · The fact that these kids were left -- 10:31:59 ·4· these four children were left in an automobile by 10:32:03 ·5· themselves with the keys in the ignition, I'm 10:32:06 ·6· told, on a -- overnight, I would call traumatic. 10:32:12 ·7· · · · Q.· · Okay. 10:32:13 ·8· · · · A.· · Certainly, I would call it an incident 10:32:15 ·9· of neglect.· Obviously, the authorities agreed 10:32:18 10· with me because I think that was the reason for 10:32:21 11· their removal from the father's care. 10:32:23 12· · · · Q.· · Right. 10:32:24 13· · · · A.· · I did not know this information at the 10:32:26 14· time I wrote my report. 10:32:27 15· · · · Q.· · Okay. 10:32:27 16· · · · A.· · But there was much suggestion in the 10:32:33 17· bit of history that I had, including what the kids 10:32:36 18· told me, that their prior years of life had been 10:32:47 19· deprived of what I consider healthy nurturing and 10:32:55 20· their -- i.e., I'm calling that traumatic. 10:32:58 21· · · · Q.· · All right.· So it sounds like we 10:33:01 22· got -- at the end, we kind of got to a list.· So I 10:33:05 23· made a list because I think in lists and so let's 10:33:07 24· do the list and we can talk about evidence then 10:33:09 25· after that. YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 56 10:33:10 ·1· · · · · · · It's your opinion -- strike that. 10:33:11 ·2· · · · · · · It's your opinion in this case that 10:33:17 ·3· the children had prior trauma.· Correct? 10:33:22 ·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Asked and 10:33:23 ·5· answered. 10:33:23 ·6· · · · A.· · Yes.· Yes.· Absolutely. 10:33:25 ·7· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: 10:33:25 ·8· · · · Q.· · And we've just made a list, and I 10:33:28 ·9· asked you to tell me of the prior trauma that 10:33:31 10· you're referring to, and I'm going to read the 10:33:34 11· list and tell me if there's anything you want to 10:33:36 12· add. 10:33:37 13· · · · · · · You first said that any child removed 10:33:39 14· from the care of their parents, that's trauma and 10:33:42 15· neglect.· You then said that there was an 10:33:44 16· inconsistent presence of their biological mother 10:33:48 17· and questions around her.· You then said that the 10:33:51 18· kids were left in the car overnight, and then we 10:33:53 19· agreed that that was actually part of their 10:33:56 20· removals.· That's part of part one and that's 10:33:59 21· neglect.· And then you then said that their prior 10:34:03 22· years of life they were deprived of healthy 10:34:05 23· nurturing. 10:34:06 24· · · · · · · Do you -- do you have anything else 10:34:07 25· you want to add to that list of prior trauma? YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 57 10:34:15 ·1· · · · A.· · Yes, but not with confidence, again, 10:34:17 ·2· because of the lack of information.· But Father 10:34:19 ·3· was imprisoned and jailed at times.· I do not know 10:34:24 ·4· whether that's true during the times of -- of any 10:34:30 ·5· of these youngsters' lives, but I had that 10:34:34 ·6· question.· That would have been trauma. 10:34:35 ·7· · · · · · · The mother's drug use, I'm -- is 10:34:39 ·8· implied in much of the history that I've read. 10:34:43 ·9· But, there again, I do not know to -- what these 10:34:46 10· children were exposed to.· But those kind of items 10:34:49 11· do fit with me referencing trauma and neglect in 10:34:57 12· these youngsters' first one to five years of -- 10:35:04 13· one to seven years of life. 10:35:06 14· · · · Q.· · So do you want to add to your list, 10:35:10 15· with medical probability, that the father was 10:35:13 16· imprisoned and in jail during the youngsters' 10:35:16 17· lifetimes and that the mothers [sic] were somehow 10:35:18 18· aware of -- of their mother's drug use?· Is that 10:35:21 19· something you want to add, with medical 10:35:22 20· probability, to your list of prior trauma? 10:35:24 21· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Foundation. 10:35:25 22· · · · A.· · Certainly -- certainly not.· I'm 10:35:28 23· sorry.· Let me finish. 10:35:29 24· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Objection. 10:35:30 25· Foundation.· Argumentative.· Compound.· You can YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 58 10:35:33 ·1· answer. 10:35:34 ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yeah.· Not with 10:35:36 ·3· medical probability because, as I've said in my 10:35:38 ·4· answer, I don't have the timeline that I need to 10:35:42 ·5· call it medically probable, but I sure do raise it 10:35:46 ·6· as a concern and a question to be answered and as 10:35:50 ·7· part of a -- an overview that I firmly call 10:36:00 ·8· neglectful and unhealthy and traumatic. 10:36:07 ·9· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: 10:36:08 10· · · · Q.· · Okay.· So my question is, with medical 10:36:11 11· probability -- because I want to go through your 10:36:14 12· list now of prior trauma and the evidence that 10:36:16 13· supports it because there has to be evidence in a 10:36:18 14· case like this, which you know.· Do you want to 10:36:20 15· add those last two items to your list, with 10:36:22 16· medical probability, or do you want to stick with 10:36:24 17· the four you provided earlier? 10:36:26 18· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Argumentative. 10:36:27 19· You can answer. 10:36:29 20· · · · A.· · I think I have answered already. I 10:36:31 21· gave you the ones that I understood to be 10:36:34 22· medically probable based upon evidence, if -- you 10:36:39 23· can call some of this as hearsay evidence, and the 10:36:44 24· others as concerns, but without timeline, so, 10:36:48 25· therefore, it can be criticized as not fitting YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 59 10:36:52 ·1· medical probability, but as areas of interest, 10:36:59 ·2· concern, worry. 10:37:01 ·3· · · · · · · And all these add to the outcomes, by 10:37:09 ·4· my experience, of various forms of mental 10:37:21 ·5· symptoms, mental condition, mental disability, 10:37:26 ·6· mood instability and such, as is seen included in 10:37:33 ·7· complex posttraumatic stress disorder.· And 10:37:38 ·8· that's -- which certainly is something that -- I 10:37:43 ·9· shouldn't say certainly -- that I feel is the case 10:37:45 10· with Charm and perhaps -- perhaps -- with her 10:37:51 11· siblings. 10:37:52 12· BY MR. MONTGOMERY: 10:37:54 13· · · · Q.· · Okay.· So with respect to the -- your 10:38:00 14· opinions, with medical probability, as to what 10:38:02 15· their prior trauma is, there's four, and we listed 10:38:06 16· them out.· Correct? 10:38:10 17· · · · A.· · At a minimum. 10:38:11 18· · · · Q.· · Well, do you want me to read them 10:38:12 19· again?· We did -- I -- 10:38:14 20· · · · A.· · No.· I'm saying but your four is not a 10:38:16 21· complete list. 10:38:16 22· · · · Q.· · They were the ones that you said "with 10:38:18 23· medical probability."· You understand how this 10:38:20 24· works, Doctor.· You've done this thousands of 10:38:22 25· times.· You're just going to prolong it because YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 100 11:31:27 ·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· If it's going to 11:31:28 ·2· be, like, 30 to an hour or something -- 11:31:29 ·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· Yeah.· No. 11:31:30 ·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· -- I would need to 11:31:31 ·5· take a break. 11:31:31 ·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. FRIEDENTHAL:· No.· It will be 11:31:32 ·7· less than five minutes. 11:31:33 ·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· Oh, okay.· Sorry. 11:31:35 ·9· Then go ahead.· Sorry to interrupt, guys. 11:31:36 10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Would the -- yeah. 11:31:38 11· Just to continue what I was saying, it was just 11:31:40 12· a -- I'm looking at it right now -- but it was a 11:31:42 13· very large number, more than I've ever recommended 11:31:46 14· or even seen recommended, even with very severe 11:31:51 15· sexual abuse.· So that's why I called it 11:31:53 16· "excessive." 11:31:53 17· BY MR. FRIEDENTHAL: 11:31:54 18· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And let's go with the number of 11:31:57 19· individual therapy that Dr. Ponton suggested was 11:32:02 20· appropriate for -- or recommended for Charm Farr. 11:32:06 21· What number -- what number do you think is more 11:32:08 22· realistic, if -- if you don't agree with her 11:32:10 23· 400 -- suggestion of 400 treatments? 11:32:14 24· · · · A.· · She's talking -- as I'm looking at it 11:32:16 25· right now, on page 6 of her report on Charm -- YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 101 11:32:20 ·1· Charm Farr, it looks to be two hour psychotherapy 11:32:25 ·2· sessions per week for four years.· That's a lot. 11:32:30 ·3· · · · Q.· · Okay. 11:32:30 ·4· · · · A.· · And years of family therapy for Charm 11:32:35 ·5· Farr with her parents -- I'm actually more 11:32:38 ·6· inclined to agree that family therapy is necessary 11:32:40 ·7· here and that kind of addresses my beliefs that 11:32:44 ·8· there's early trauma here.· And whose 11:32:52 ·9· responsibility, that is another issue.· Not for me 11:32:55 10· right now, I imagine, but that made more sense to 11:32:59 11· me. 11:32:59 12· · · · · · · But even -- so two years of family 11:33:01 13· therapy is a lot to recommend.· Again, it's 11:33:07 14· probably impractical because these folks have not 11:33:10 15· even followed through.· The parents -- the father, 11:33:14 16· really -- has not even followed through with 11:33:16 17· psychotherapy in the -- from what I read -- with 11:33:23 18· Ms. Morehouse, I think is her name, such that it 11:33:27 19· had to be discontinued. 11:33:28 20· · · · · · · But that as an aside, it seems pie in 11:33:31 21· the sky to me and it's just a lot.· It's really a 11:33:39 22· lot. 11:33:39 23· · · · Q.· · Well, aside from saying, "It's a lot," 11:33:42 24· do you have any numbers in mind or ranges in mind 11:33:45 25· that would be not a lot that would be more YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 103 11:35:07 ·1· fitting with what a seasoned therapist charges 11:35:10 ·2· for -- for psychotherapy, individual 11:35:15 ·3· psychotherapy, or even family therapy.· $400, I 11:35:18 ·4· see for family therapy.· Wow.· That's high. 11:35:22 ·5· · · · Q.· · Do you know why these three children 11:35:27 ·6· haven't had therapy consistently since the -- they 11:35:31 ·7· were taken out of the Martinez home? 11:35:34 ·8· · · · A.· · Well, the only thing I know for, I 11:35:37 ·9· guess, a fact is that the therapy provided by, I 11:35:43 10· think, Interfaith -- I forget the name of it -- 11:35:46 11· Interfaith Network, I think, had to be 11:35:48 12· discontinued because of lack of compliance.· So 11:35:51 13· that interrupted what was a therapy program.· So 11:35:56 14· that'd be one factor. 11:35:59 15· · · · · · · Lack of motivation, lack of 11:36:00 16· compliance, alcoholic on the part of, let's say, 11:36:03 17· the parent, Mr. Farr. 11:36:10 18· · · · Q.· · Are there services that are provided 11:36:13 19· free of charge or for a significantly reduced 11:36:17 20· charge that you're aware of through any 11:36:20 21· organization or -- or governmental entity for 11:36:24 22· victims of child abuse? 11:36:27 23· · · · A.· · Certainly, yes.· There's community 11:36:29 24· mental health.· As I said, I was involved in that 11:36:33 25· for so many years.· It still exists in each of the YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f HARVEY LERCHIN, M.D. - 08/30/2023 Page 104 11:36:38 ·1· counties in California and these -- these 11:36:40 ·2· youngsters would qualify there. 11:36:42 ·3· · · · · · · They'd probably almost certainly 11:36:46 ·4· qualify for Medicaid services, considering the 11:36:49 ·5· income level.· And even more easily, they qualify 11:36:54 ·6· for witness -- not witness -- child victim -- 11:37:00 ·7· victim program, child victim -- California child 11:37:03 ·8· victim program that pays the fee, the therapist's 11:37:08 ·9· fee for youngsters of -- where there's known 11:37:15 10· abuse, and that would -- at least Charm would 11:37:18 11· qualify for that one, if not the other children as 11:37:20 12· well.· The Victim Witness Program, I think it's 11:37:23 13· called. 11:37:24 14· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Last area of questioning. 11:37:26 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. MONTGOMERY:· And just belated -- 11:37:28 16· and just belated objection.· Improper references 11:37:30 17· to collateral source.· Not relevant.· Not 11:37:33 18· reasonably calculated.· Sorry.· Go ahead. 19· BY MR. FRIEDENTHAL: 11:37:35 20· · · · Q.· · Last -- last area of questioning.· You 11:37:37 21· had a chance to review the mental health notes 11:37:39 22· from -- that you were provided.· Correct?· From -- 11:37:46 23· · · · A.· · You mean therapy notes? 11:37:48 24· · · · Q.· · From Morehouse? 11:37:49 25· · · · A.· · Yes. YVer1f Litigation Services, a Veritext Company· |· 800-330-1112 www.litigationservices.com | The LIT Group 079F YVer1f 1 PROOF OF SERVICE C.F., et al. v. Martinez, et al. 2 Case No.: SCV264540 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: 4 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 5 I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the 6 age of 18 and not a party to this action. My business address is: 1520 W. Colorado Boulevard, Second Floor, Pasadena, California 91105. My electronic (email) address 7 is nruiz@fhblawyers.com. 8 On September 12, 2023, I electronically served the foregoing document named: DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE 9 NUMBER FIVE TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT, DR. LERCHIN, FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; 10 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL on the parties indicated in the attached Service List. 11 MAIL SERVICE: As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of 12 collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully 13 prepaid at Pasadena, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date 14 or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in 15 affidavit. FEDERAL EXPRESS SERVICE: I caused such envelopes to be delivered by 16 Federal Express to the offices of the addressee listed on the attached Service List. I 17 further designed such envelopes to be delivered to all addressees on the attached Service List utilizing Fed-Ex’s “Overnight Next-Day Delivery Service.” 18 ELECTRONIC MEANS (EMAIL): I caused such document(s) to be electronically 19 served through email for the above-entitled matter. This service complies with Code of Civil Procedure §1010.6(e)(1) and/or California Rule of Court 2.251(C)(3) and/or 20 an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission. The file transmission was reported as complete and a copy of the “Sent” page noting the date 21 and time of such transmission will be maintained with the file copy of the document(s) 22 in our office. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on September 12, 2023, at Pasadena, 24 California. 25 Natasha Ruiz 26 27 For purposes of serving documents on Friedenthal, Heffernan & Brown, LLP, please use the following email addresses: 28 dfriedenthal@fhblawyers.com; jbrown@fhblawyers.com; nruiz@fhblawyers.com -1- PROOF OF SERVICE 1 SERVICE LIST C.F., et al. v. Martinez, et al. 2 Case No.: SCV264540 3 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, C.F., E.F. and S.F. by and through their GAL, 4 SOLOMON FARR Scott R. Montgomery, Esq. Johann Hall, Esq. 5 ABBEY, WEITZENBERG, WARREN & THE LAW OFFICE OF JOHANN HALL EMERY, P.C. 703 2nd St., Suite 353 6 100 Stony Point Rd., Suite 200 Santa Rosa, CA 95405 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 Tel. No.: (707) 360-8717 7 Tel. No.: (707) 542-5050 Fax No.: (707) 921-7378 8 Fax No.: (707) 542-2589 johann@jhallesq.com smontgomery@abbeylaw.com; 9 hnorton@abbeylaw.com; nberg@abbeylaw.com; 10 kwright@abbeylaw.com 11 Criminal Attorneys for MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ 12 Chris P. Andrian, Esq. ANDRIAN & GALLENSON 13 1100 Mendocino Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95401 14 Tel. No.: (707) 527-9381 15 Fax No.: (707) 526-9051 Andgal.chris@sonic.net 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- PROOF OF SERVICE